auroranorth
|
posted on July 14, 2002 02:56:25 PM new
In the Under god case, the father brought suit never bothered to marry the mother, and the mother says her little hirl does not have a problem saying the pledge!!!!!!!
|
auroranorth
|
posted on July 14, 2002 02:57:41 PM new
make that Little Girl (I have fingers much bigger than the keys.)
|
Linda_K
|
posted on July 14, 2002 05:23:16 PM new
Yes....I read that last Thursday.
Seems the Mother and daughter are church going Christians. The mother said she wanted to be sure no one thought her daughter had a problem with saying the pledge [including under God] let alone just hearing it.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,57554,00.html
and
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,57511,00.html
|
gravid
|
posted on July 14, 2002 06:07:16 PM new
I notice she does not have any trouble having an out of wedlock child with an athiest.
Real tolerant for a devout Christian.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on July 14, 2002 06:16:25 PM new
LOL gravid - Good point. Maybe she became a Christian after they separated. The article doesn't state her age at conception, nor how long they were together. Many people don't get to know the other partner well enough before beginning a sexual relationship, so maybe she didn't know how strongly he felt against any religion. Maybe she did...but didn't care.
Now there's a custody battle and I'll bet a lot of it has to do with his daughter being raised in a Christian home.
I just found the lawyers views on the possibility of this case being dismissed because the child wasn't 'harmed' as the court plea had suggested.
|
gravid
|
posted on July 14, 2002 07:01:55 PM new
Easy out for them without having to back down on the real issues.
|
REAMOND
|
posted on July 14, 2002 08:00:40 PM new
It doesn't make any difference if the Plaintiff is christian or not. The "harm" they speak of in a separation case is a general harm.
It would be quite a stretch to stay the father doesn't have standing to bring the suit due to his daughters religious beliefs.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on July 14, 2002 08:21:31 PM new
You may very well be right, Reamond. Only time will tell.
There are still many who can't believe the US Supreme's decided the way they did about vouchers either.
I just found the article interesting.
|
REAMOND
|
posted on July 14, 2002 09:38:59 PM new
It is truly amazing how these cases always seem to come up in time of "war". It is the time the SC would least like to address them.
|
auroranorth
|
posted on July 14, 2002 11:07:41 PM new
Now Just a minute,
if he is not the custodial
parent and therefore he has no rigths to bring suit, then wouldnt that mean that Clinton and co violated the Little Cuban Boys right to sancutary as his mothers the custodial parents dying wish ?
|
Borillar
|
posted on July 15, 2002 10:23:52 AM new
The "little Cuban Boy" Alien Gonzoles (my pun), whose mother died, custody reverted to the father, who wanted him back with him in Cuba. Are you against that, AN? Do you feel that you have more right to say what is best for that child than his very father does? If so, please consider International Law also required that Alien Gonzoles be returned to his father -- otherwise, it woud have been state0sanctioned KIDNAPPING. Or, were you wanting to add that one to the list of "crimes" perpetrated by Clinton?
|
auroranorth
|
posted on July 15, 2002 12:35:24 PM new
and thats the whole point that you think a democrat would understand easier than an independant or a republican. that point is is that basic human rights supercede international this is a legal principle that has been used since the end of world war two. The same legal precedent that says a soldier cannot cop out of crimminal behavior pleading ''I was only following orders''
applies here!
You Bonilar by agreeing to this are the fascist!
and I'm not picking on you I am pointing out to you the bigger picture.this was not a custody case to middle class America. this was an idealogical struggle that our politicians are supposed to be a part of not Jane Fonda like stinking traitors.
We expect the democrats to stick up for the working people yet all Clinton did was shaft and rip off the poor and screw anything he got his hands on.
It was your troops that kicked in the door in the middle of the night with jackboots on.
The rural citizens of America watched this in Horror.
You guys need to put some fresh blood in the democratic party it is as bad if not worse than the republicans when it comes to this feifdom business.
You think that last election was close ?well unless the democrats buy cigarettes and dope booze and condoms needles and empty the nursing homes they will not stand a chance running the queen rural America see her as the person who could not recall in front of congress.
They see her as a gun grabbing leftist elitist and a theif and a liar with a pile of dead bodies stacked around here and her old man that makes one wonder whatever happened to woodward and bernstien.
You are saying this is the law of this marxist state and we as Americans have to take someone who came here for refuge and return them to a gang of filthy scum that has terrorized the peaceful people of that island with the Marxist perversion for decades. A nation that assaulted American Interests all over the world.
A Nation that attempted to become a base for missiles that would have brought horror to every American family.
A Nation that even tody does not behave in the face of any international law then has the guts to use this kid as a publicity stunt.
A nation that Intentionally sent as many of their crimminal element here to poison our Country.
|
gravid
|
posted on July 15, 2002 01:49:20 PM new
If political ideology supercedes parental rights then I guess everytime the election puts in a new party the kids will all be stripped from one set of parents to another.
It will sure make custody cases easier. "Are you a Repulican and your husband is a Democrat? Republicans are in - you win."
Of course democratic "under God" vs communist heathen athiest is different than mere internal flavors right?
Then we should have the CIA formulate a plan to liberate the trapped masses of innocent children in such communist lands to freedom - right?
Right is right. Wonder what the people in India or Greece will think of that? They might worry they are not suitable parents in our sight.
|
auroranorth
|
posted on July 15, 2002 09:09:55 PM new
Dont give me that hypothetical guff,
yuor telling me that we should have handed back the people who crawled over the berlin wall? Cause its the same thing. And Yes When reagan called the Soviets an evil empire he had the blessing of every clear thinking person on the planet. (and republicans too!)
|
Borillar
|
posted on July 15, 2002 10:31:38 PM new
"that point is is that basic human rights supercede international ..."
That kid's "Basic Human Rights" are left to the Father to decide upon. Unlike those who climbed over the Berlin Wall who were also adults. If a father does not have a right to his own children (especially if the mother is dead), then who does? In your arguement, your contention is that it's the State. I can tell you that the list of what's wrong with that kind of thinking could bring on a list many pages deep. If a man does not have a right to his own kids, then what biological right does anyone have? If the father had said, "No! Let him live in America with his relatives!" nobody would be complaining, not even Castro. But that father chose what he felt was the best for his own flesh and blood and that's the end of that. Period. This basic right of a Parent is observed in every nation and culture on earth and throughout all of history - execpt for a few crackpots who think that they know differently. Sorry.
|
auroranorth
|
posted on July 16, 2002 08:38:09 PM new
Now your not agreeing with yourself !
in the case of the mother who left the kids baking in the car you didnt think she had that right.
|
Borillar
|
posted on July 16, 2002 10:16:27 PM new
What danger do you see Alien Gonzoles getting into because of his father wanting him to stay in Cuba?
|
mlecher
|
posted on July 17, 2002 08:12:07 AM new
Apparently the law, according to some posters here, is that "Democratic Nations" have the God given right, no make that DUTY, to kidnap children from "enemy" nations. Have to specify enemy to exclude those hell-hole dictorship and oppressive sewer pits that are our "friends". Hundreds of children have been physically kidnapped by the non-custodial parents and taken back to their country of origin. You say the American parent has no right to get them back???
Awaiting your hypocritical answer.....
.
Reality is a serious condition brought on by a lack of alcohol in the system
|
auroranorth
|
posted on July 17, 2002 08:28:52 AM new
Are you saying his mother kidnappded Him ?
|
mlecher
|
posted on July 17, 2002 08:53:43 AM new
No, his relatives did....and you want the gov't to sanction kidnapping. You have to think about it for a minute, maybe longer....the second the mother died, custody reverts to the living PARENT. The relatives held him ILLEGALLY according to the LAW. The courts confirmed that.
.
Reality is a serious condition brought on by a lack of alcohol in the system
|
auroranorth
|
posted on July 17, 2002 11:28:57 AM new
Nonsense, thus government every day removes children from parents parents like the idiot who left her kids in a car or drunks or druggies or just plain screw ups so dont even try to give me this Human rights take precedent over parental rights.
Lets play once upon a time and see how your decision looks.
1941 November.
the English channel,
a mother who fled the Franco governments political turmoil and repression with her son in a small boat died in the arms of a an American Naval officer here today.
The Nuetral American vessel was in hostile waters enforcing the neutrality of American Shipping.
She fled Spain (with her son)where her Estranged Husband is a member of Hitler's elite condor legion bound for the assault on Russia.
The father has requested custody of the son so that He could live in Germany and become a member of the Hitler youth.
Is it still a simple custody case ?
|
auroranorth
|
posted on July 18, 2002 04:02:59 AM new
The silence is deafening
|
mlecher
|
posted on July 18, 2002 08:08:34 AM new
yes, it is a simple custody case. Just because you don't believe in the politics doesn't change ANYTHING one Iota.
So much for the silence, some went to go on with our life.
.
Reality is a serious condition brought on by a lack of alcohol in the system
|
auroranorth
|
posted on July 18, 2002 06:26:45 PM new
the year is 2001
in the Indian ocean an american Naval patrol has picked up a young boy refuge from the Taliban militia. His mother tried crossing into India where she was hunted down. She went to sea in a small boat hoping for an American rescue of her and her son, She died in the Navy seals arms asking him to take her son to America to freedom.
The father a ardent member of Bin Ladens Al Queida has asked for the boys return so he could be trained for an important mission on sept 11.
I know this is not reaching core processing.
|
stockticker
|
posted on July 18, 2002 07:02:53 PM new
Continuing Auroranorth's story...
the U.S. government says no. The child's only other living relative, an uncle living in California, offers to take him. He's no a fit parent though and wants the child simply to provide some unpaid labor on his farm. A short time later, he beats the child to death.
Irene
|
auroranorth
|
posted on July 18, 2002 11:29:49 PM new
You know its so disenheartening to see all you guys pick on our governemnt for no reason.... Like that last remark now you know very well that they would have sent the child to Florida and lost him.
|
Borillar
|
posted on July 18, 2002 11:41:59 PM new
"The silence is deafening" because you didn't answer my question, AN.
|
Borillar
|
posted on July 18, 2002 11:43:10 PM new
"A short time later, he beats the child to death."
LOL! Stockticker! Are you sure it wasn't really a case of the uncle accidently leaving the kid inside the car all afternoon on a hot day?
|
Borillar
|
posted on July 21, 2002 03:53:08 PM new
"I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of America
And to the Ideals for which it stands
And to the Republic which was built upon it,
A Nation Unified in Liberty, Justice and Equality for All."
That's the Pledge of Allegiance that I use every day. of course, you can swaer allegiance to anything you want to. I happen to like mine much better than the one forced on kids in schools; e.g. if you are going to say it out loud, this is the one that you must use, etc.
|
auroranorth
|
posted on July 21, 2002 09:22:25 PM new
WHAT QUESTION ?
The fact is is that is the social services dept determines a home is unfit they remove the child. Our government by having an embargo on Cuba has legally said to the state of Florida Social Services dept that Cuba is an Unfit home for a Child.
You guys turn your back on this helpless Child then expect us to sally forth inthe name of the other causes, without freedom for this child the other causes mean nothing.
|
